Tedla v. Ellman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Tedla v. Ellman

253 A.D. 764, 300 N.Y.S. 1051, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5497

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 24, 1937

StatusPublished

This text of 253 A.D. 764 (Tedla v. Ellman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Tedla v. Ellman, 253 A.D. 764, 300 N.Y.S. 1051, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5497 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1937).

Pincite

Opinion

Consolidated actions. One action was brought by Mary Bachek, as administratrix, to recover damages for the death of her intestate as the result of injuries received when struck by an automobile as he was trundling a baby carriage, filled with wood and junk, on a public highway. The other action was brought by Anna Tedla to recover damages for personal injuries received in the same accident and while she was pushing a baby carriage similarly loaded, and by her husband to recover for medical expenses and loss of services. Judgments in favor of plaintiffs and orders denying motion to set aside the verdicts unanimously affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Present —■ Hagarty, Davis, Adel, Taylor and Close, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Consolidated actions. One action was brought by Mary Bachek, as administratrix, to recover damages for the death of her intestate as the result of injuries received when struck by an automobile as he was trundling a baby carriage, filled with wood and junk, on a public highway. The other action was brought by Anna Tedla to recover damages for personal injuries received in the same accident and while she was pushing a baby carriage similarly loaded, and by her husband to recover for medical expenses and loss of services. Judgments in favor of plaintiffs and orders denying motion to set aside the verdicts unanimously affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Present —■ Hagarty, Davis, Adel, Taylor and Close, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

253 A.D. 764, 300 N.Y.S. 1051, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5497, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tedla-v-ellman-nyappdiv-1937.